News

Churches

Reformed Witness Hour - March 2025

RWH Logo 2019

March 2025

We have five Christ-centered, gospel-themed messages by Rev. Carl Haak for the month of March. Help us share these messages with friends, family, and neighbors!

CHaak GT PRC

 

March 2

Not Weary in Well-Doing

Galatians 6:9

March 9

The True Christian Life

2 Timothy 4:7-8

March 16

Spiritual Lethargy

Song of Solomon 5:1-8

March 23

Grace for Today

Matthew 6:34

March 30

Freedom

Romans 8:2

Sign Up for Our Email Newsletter

Visit our website or go to eepurl.com/gikNsL to sign up for our monthly email. You’ll receive a monthly email with RWH news, statistics, message excerpts, and other great content.

PO Box 1230, Grand Rapids MI 49501           reformedwitnesshour.org           rwh@prca.org

Read more...

Covenant Reformed News - February 2025

Covenant Reformed News
February 2025 • Volume XX, Issue 10


 

Are the Ungodly Really in God’s Image? (2)

Last time, we introduced the widespread but erroneous view that totally depraved sinners are in the image of the infinitely holy God in an alleged “broader” sense. To our previous critique we now add three more arguments.

First, what about the nature of the divine image in man? The inspired Scriptures give us explicit statements as to the contents of the image of God in which the elect are recreated, and Adam and Eve were created (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10; cf. Ecc. 7:29), namely knowledge, righteousness and holiness, as is recognized in the Reformed creeds (e.g., Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q. & A. 10).

But what is the imago dei that unbelievers are supposed to bear? Typically, some or all of the following are mentioned: rationality, morality, volitions, affections, personhood and speech, etc. These things do indeed characterize man—whether believing or unbelieving—but there are no biblical texts that specify the nature of a divine image in the ungodly. Nor is there any solid exegesis of even a single verse of Scripture that identifies the content of an image of God in the wicked.

Second, what about the number of the divine image(s) in man? According to the theory that absolutely everyone is in the image of God, there are necessarily two images of God in man (and angels): the biblical imago dei, consisting in knowledge, righteousness and holiness (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10), and the “broader” imago dei. The unbeliever bears one image of God, while the believer possesses two divine images: the imago dei in the apostolic sense and in the “wider” sense. Before the new birth, the elect possess one imago dei, the image of God in its “broader” aspect. Through being born again, the elect receive a second divine image.

But where does God’s Word ever speak of two images of God in man? Or of unbelievers having one image and believers having two images? Or of the elect possessing one divine image before regeneration and two divine images after it?

Third, what about the idea of the divine image in man? According to the very first biblical reference to the imago dei, those who are in God’s image are also in His likeness, for “God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26; cf. v. 27; 5:1). Moreover, someone who is in the likeness of another is the likeness of another, and someone who is in the image of another is the image of another (cf. I Cor. 11:7; II Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15). Besides uniting the image of God and the likeness of God, Scripture also joins these concepts to the glory of God. Since God is glorious, those who are His image and likeness are glorious too! Thus believing men are “the image and glory of God” (I Cor. 11:7; cf. II Cor. 3:18; 4:4, 6; Heb. 1:3).

But is it true that the ungodly are the image and likeness and glory of God? Are Emperor Julian the Apostate, King Louis XIV, Karl Marx and Jeffrey Epstein really the image, likeness and glory of God? Satan is the image of God, the likeness of God and the glory of God? This important biblical concept carries a lot of theological freight. Surely, identifying the wicked as God’s image is wrong!  Rev. Angus Stewart

 

Why Was David Not Executed for Adultery and Murder?

Our question for this issue of the News has to do with David’s sin with Bathsheba: “If Old Testament law required that all murderers and adulterers be stoned to death, why was David not executed for his (known) sins of adultery and murder? Was he above the law? Did the law not apply to him? Did his merely being sorry for his deeds absolve him of any liability to capital punishment?”

The readers of the News have a knack for asking difficult questions. There are times when the questions leave me a bit dismayed because of their difficulty. Sometimes I have to work on them and think about them for quite a while. Nevertheless, I appreciate them, since they force me to look into things I have never considered before and to study the Word of God anew.

The law requiring the execution of an adulterer is found in Leviticus 20:10: “And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death” (cf. Deut. 22:22).

The law of Moses requiring the death of a murderer is found in Leviticus 24:17: “And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death” (cf. Ex. 21:12-14; Num. 35:16-21).

In the ordinances given to Noah after the flood, God established the death penalty for murder long before the Mosaic law: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man” (Gen. 9:6). The fact that in the beginning men and women (unlike animals) were created in the likeness and image of God (1:26-27) is one of the reasons why there ought to be a death penalty for murder in our day also. Paul writes, “if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (Rom. 13:4; cf. Acts 25:11).

All this, however, does not answer our question, since it should be evident from all these passages that David fully deserved the death penalty for his crimes. Why then was he not put to death either by God or by man?

Is the king above the law? Some argue for that position and use the example of David as proof. Many kings and rulers have taken that view of themselves, and have used the notion that they are above the law as an excuse for gross wickedness. In the United States, sitting presidents have immunity from civil and criminal charges regarding their official acts and duties. Is this why David was not punished?

It should be noted that one’s high position in commonwealth or church does not excuse one’s sins but rather aggravates them. This is clearly set forth from Scripture in Westminster Larger Catechism, Questions and Answers 150 and 151. David’s sins were worse because of his lofty office of king, because he broke the express letter of the law of God, because they were a public scandal (II Sam. 12:14) and because they involved the complicity of others, Bathsheba and Joab. There was, and is, no excuse for David’s sins.

David himself admitted that he was worthy of death when, after hearing Nathan’s parable of the rich man who took the poor man’s lamb, he said, “As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die” (5). That he deserved death was also Nathan’s word to him after he repented: “The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die” (13). There is no ground in the story of David’s sins in II Samuel 11-12 for the foolish notion that any man, ruler or ruled, is above the law of God.

Especially in the church, there must be penalties for gross and public sins committed by an ecclesiastical leader: deposition from office and, if he remains impenitent, excommunication, the church’s equivalent of the death penalty. No one is immune. Indeed, the penalties for an office-bearer ought to be more severe (including removal from ecclesiastical office), because his position and example aggravate his sin.

David escaped the death penalty, as II Samuel 12:13 indicates, only because God was merciful to him and for no other reason. That God put away his sin simply means that God forgave him as David himself confesses, “I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin” (Ps. 32:5).

There are a number of things that must be said about the mercy that was shown to David. He avoided the death penalty, as well as the eternal penalty for sin, but he did not escape totally unscathed. The son whom he had begotten with Bathsheba died, as Nathan had prophesied (II Sam. 12:14, 18). Moreover, God told David through Nathan, “Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife. Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun. For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun” (10-12). David suffered the consequences of his sin for the rest of his life. God is merciful, but He is also just and He will not be mocked. He will always show that He hates sin and does not overlook it.

Jehovah shows the same mercy that He manifested to David to other great sinners also, three of whom especially come to mind. One was the woman taken in adultery (John 8:1-11). Jesus, though He never indicated that the woman did not deserve death, was interested first in exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. When their hypocrisy was exposed, He showed divine mercy to the woman when He said to her, “Neither do I condemn thee” (11). Lest anyone think, however, that He did not care about the sins that the woman had committed, He told her also to sin no more (11).

Another was Paul the persecutor. Regarding himself, he says, “Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief” (I Tim. 1:13).

A third to whom such mercy has been shown is the poor sinner who has written this article, a sinner whose sins are far worse than David’s or Paul’s and whose sins are aggravated by so many things. Great mercy has been shown to him also.

This is to say that everyone of us deserves not just the death penalty for the sins he commits but deserves far worse. Blasphemy, murder, adultery and such like deserve the death penalty, and are we not all guilty of such sins, if not publicly, then in our hearts and thoughts? Are not the wages of sin, any sin, all sin, eternal death (Rom. 6:23)?

“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matt. 5:21-22). Who is blameless?

“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (27-28). Who is not in need of mercy?

What can anyone say to excuse himself or herself? Shall I complain about the mercy shown to David when I am in as great need of mercy as he was? Is not my insisting that David deserved the death penalty only my self-condemnation? If I am not the publican in the parable of Jesus “standing afar off, [who] would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13), then who am I?

What Nathan said to David is not only the explanation why Israel’s king was not put to death for his crimes but it is also the gospel, the only good news that sinners under condemnation and in danger of eternal judgment will ever hear: “The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die” (II Sam. 12:13). Nor is there any reason for such amazing mercy but a cross set on a hill outside Jerusalem, where once our Lord was crucified. That mercy is not shown to those whose sins are less than the sins of others or who are less deserving of eternal condemnation, but it is shown to all who repent and believe in Him who died on that cross.

Because we are such terrible sinners that none of us would ever repent and believe of ourselves, the God of all grace and the Father of mercies grants repentance and faith to some (Acts 11:18; Eph. 2:8; Phil. 1:29). He does this so that they may say with David, “Many sorrows shall be to the wicked: but he that trusteth in the Lord, mercy shall compass him about. Be glad in the Lord, and rejoice, ye righteous: and shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart” (Ps. 32:10-11). Rev. Ron Hanko

Covenant Protestant Reformed Church
83 Clarence Street, Ballymena, BT43 5DR • Lord’s Day services at 11 am & 6 pm
Website: https://cprc.co.uk/ • Live broadcast: cprc.co.uk/live-streaming/
Pastor: Angus Stewart, 7 Lislunnan Road, Kells, N. Ireland, BT42 3NR • (028) 25 891851  
pastor@cprc.co.uk • www.youtube.com/cprcni • www.facebook.com/CovenantPRC
Read more...

Covenant Reformed News - January 2025

 

Covenant Reformed News
January 2025 • Volume XX, Issue 9


 

Are the Ungodly Really in God’s Image? (1)

There are three parties that all professing Christians agree are in God’s image or the imago dei according to Scripture: first, the eternal and incarnate Son of God (II Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3), second, pre-fall Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:26-27; 5:1), and, third, all those born again by the Spirit of Christ (e.g., Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10).

But there is disagreement regarding unbelievers: Is fallen and unregenerate man in the image of God? This is the most controversial question involved in the whole subject of the imago dei. It is also a very important issue, especially in our day, when the notion that everybody is in God’s image has taken hold of many and is being used to promote all sorts of unbiblical teaching, including man’s free will (Rom. 8:5-8), the unequal yoke between believers and unbelievers (II Cor. 6:14-7:1), the salvation of unevangelized pagans (Rom. 10:14), women in church office (I Tim. 2:12), homosexual marriage (Matt. 19:4-6), etc., as well as to deny scriptural doctrines, such as total depravity (Rom. 3:9-19), eternal punishment (Matt. 25:46), etc.

The majority view in Christendom today is that all the unregenerate possess God’s image in a “broader” and lesser sense, whereas the regenerate have been restored to the imago dei in a fuller and richer way. The “wider” and unlosable aspect of the imago dei, they claim, includes man’s intellectual powers, volitional freedom and natural affections. They allege that every fallen and unbelieving human being retains the image of God, since he or she continues to possess an immaterial soul or spirit and conscience, with the ability to think, make decisions, use language and form moral judgments. In this series of articles, Lord willing, we will present numerous arguments against this popular but dangerous error.

First, if the ungodly are really in the image of God, then the man of sin (II Thess. 2:3) is in the image of the God of righteousness! To use some of his other names, according to this theory, the son of perdition (3) is the image of the Lord of heaven, the wicked one (8) is the image of the Holy One of Israel and the Antichrist (I John 2:18) is the image of Christ, the image of God par excellence! What sense does it make to identify as Jehovah’s image the coming beast who will open “his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven” (Rev. 13:6)? Can one who is truly in the image of God declare that he alone is God and the only object of worship (II Thess. 2:4)? Is the beast who will require all to worship his own image under pain of death (Rev. 13:12-15) really in God’s image?

Second, if fallen man is in the image of God because he possesses the power of reason and volition, then Satan himself and his demons are also in the imago dei. Nay more, as Martin Luther, arguing against the supposed “broader” sense of the divine image, points out, the devil “has these natural endowments, such as [a prodigious] memory and a very superior intellect and a most determined will, to a far higher degree than we have them.” Thus Satan is a particularly splendid image of God, possessing the divine likeness (in its “wider” aspect) far more than any believer! Rev. A. Stewart

 

Law and Grace

After writing quite a few articles in the News on the law of God, I had intended to move on to other matters. But then I received a rather urgent request from a brother in England, asking me to comment on the following statement which he believes to be erroneous, as also do I. The erroneous statement is: “The Ten Commandments have nothing to do with us [i.e., believers] now in keeping them. It is Jesus Christ who is keeping it [i.e., God’s moral law] for those who are in Him. He has obeyed it for us; He did everything for us. We are to walk and live by His faith in us through the Holy Spirit. We do nothing, but believe and trust Him by the help of the Holy Spirit in our new born-again nature. The kingdom of God is now in us spiritually by the new covenant which God the Father made with His Son. That is the true gospel of good news and it is glad tidings of great joy to us. We have a new nature in us through regeneration by the Holy Spirit.”

The brother then adds the following comments: “I think [he] is very wrong in saying that we do not have to obey or keep the law which Christ’s commanded. [He] is saying that we are saved by grace and have no need to keep the law, because we cannot do it, and that, because Christ is in us, He keeps the law for us.”

There are a number of matters to address in all of that, including the notion that we do not have to keep the law. That flatly contradicts what Jesus Himself says in John 14:15: “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” It is argued that Christ is not speaking of the Ten Commandments but of His commandments. But, as we have pointed out in recent articles, Matthew 5:21-48 makes it clear that Jesus’ commandments are essentially the same as the Ten Commandments that were given at Mount Sinai. Christ makes explicit reference to the law as given at Horeb in Matthew 5:17-20. There He also shows us that keeping and teaching the Ten Commandments is crucial.

If we do not have to keep the commandments, then Christians may indulge in idolatry, blasphemy, Sabbath breaking, rebellion against authority, murder, fornication, theft and every kind of evil speaking without any fear of consequences. Then the answer to Paul’s second rhetorical question in Romans 6:1 is an antinomian yes: “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?”

What is so ironic about the statements of the person whose views are being critiqued here is that the erroneous statement claims, “We do nothing, but believe and trust Him,” but even believing or trusting is something that Christ commands. Indeed, it is what He commands above all else! Jesus says to Thomas, “Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing” (John 20:27). Jesus says to His disciples, “Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me” (14:1). These are commands! That faith is God’s gift, and a matter of the gracious work of the Holy Spirit in us, does not change the fact that believing is something commanded by the gospel.

Would the person whose views are being analyzed deny that we are active in believing, as some claim? He already says, regarding obedience to the commandments, “It is Jesus Christ who is keeping it [i.e., God’s moral law] for those who are in Him. He has obeyed it for us; He did everything for us.” It is only a very small step from that to saying that it is really Christ who does the believing or trusting as well. The Canons of Dordt rightly state that human beings are not “senseless stocks and blocks” (III/IV:16).

In the churches to which I belong, there was a controversy in this area a few years ago and some left us. The idea that we are active in anything, even in believing, is seen as a denial of salvation by grace, and so all the commands of Scripture are understood, not as requirements for us but, only as showing our inability. That leads to the notion that the “new man” in Christ is really not me at all but the Holy Spirit. That, in turn, leads to the teaching that believers in their entirety are still totally depraved, dead in trespasses and sins, which is a denial of the regenerating and renewing work of the Holy Spirit.

Thankfully, the person whose views are being criticized does not appear to hold that latter view for he says, “We have a new nature in us through regeneration by the Holy Spirit.” It is that new nature that loves God, obeys Him, believes in Christ, is sorry for sin. It is the believer, renewed and regenerated, who says, “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man” (Rom. 7:22) and “So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God” (25).

That “It is Jesus Christ who is keeping it [i.e. God’s moral law] for us who are in Him. He has obeyed it for us; He did everything for us,” is partly true. He kept the law for us as our justifier, doing all the law required as our Head, and so delivering us from the punishment of sin and eternal damnation. There is nothing left for me to do by way of making myself “right” with God. He has done everything necessary. All that is now commanded of me is that I show my thanks to God for what Christ has done by obeying Him and thus showing my love for Him in deeds as well as in words.

Even in that, He does not leave me to myself and my own efforts, for God gives me His Holy Spirit to work within me both the willing and the doing of what He commands (Phil. 2:12-13). Nevertheless, when all is said and done, I am the one who obeys, is thankful to God and lives a Christian life. My thankfulness and obedience have no merit in them. I cannot, and I do not need to, merit with God. Christ’s merits are my righteousness and acceptance with God. My thankfulness is not a reason for pride, because I owe every word of thanks and every grateful deed to God’s grace. Thankful and obedient, I thank God for my thankfulness and obedience.

It is similar as regards my eating and drinking. God does not keep me alive without eating and drinking. I must eat and drink to be strong and healthy. I must not think that my eating and drinking are a denial of God’s sovereignty as the Giver of life. I may not expect that Christ, who is my everything, will do my eating and drinking for me. So I eat and drink, trusting as a Christian that God will bless my eating and drinking.

Moreover, God shows me in different ways that He is sovereign even in that part of my life. He shows me this by occasionally keeping someone alive without eating and drinking (e.g., Moses and Elijah at Mount Sinai), but also by making eating and drinking the death of some by poison or by choking. For others, some of their eating (e.g., grains or seeds for those with diverticulitis) and drinking (e.g., contaminated water) not only does not keep them strong and healthy, but makes them ill.

This brings me to the final part of this article: the supposed conflict between law and grace. Just as the law that I must eat to live is not in conflict with the sovereign work of God in keeping me alive, so the supposed conflict between law and grace is false. This also is the explicit teaching of the Word in Galatians 3:21: “Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.” It is also the teaching of Romans 7:12: “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”

Indeed, in the matter of God’s law and His grace, there is more to be said. There is grace in what Jehovah commands, when He speaks to those whom He has chosen and redeemed and justified. The command, to them, is grace. “For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast” (Ps. 33:9). His Word is powerful and effective, so it never returns without accomplishing exactly what God intends (Isa. 55:11). He commands repentance and faith, and by His commands He works repentance and faith in some, His elect, those for whom Christ died and those whom the Spirit regenerates. He commands thankful obedience and by that Word works grateful service in the hearts and lives of His own.

I, redeemed, justified and renewed, begin to serve Him with a love that shows itself not only in words of thankfulness but also in a life of holiness. Until I die, I do so imperfectly and with much sin and struggle, for I am also that old man of which Scripture speaks (Eph. 4:22; Col. 3:9).

So I say with the apostle Paul, “I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin” (Rom. 7:21-25).

Thanks be to God, indeed!  Rev. Ron Hanko

Covenant Protestant Reformed Church
83 Clarence Street, Ballymena, BT43 5DR • Lord’s Day services at 11 am & 6 pm
Website: https://cprc.co.uk/ • Live broadcast: cprc.co.uk/live-streaming/
Pastor: Angus Stewart, 7 Lislunnan Road, Kells, N. Ireland, BT42 3NR • (028) 25 891851  
pastor@cprc.co.uk • www.youtube.com/cprcni • www.facebook.com/CovenantPRC
Read more...

Reformed Witness Hour News - February 2025

RWH Logo 2019

News from the Reformed Witness Hour

February 2025

 

Help Us Get the Word Out!

For the month of February, Rev. Carl Haak will lead us again with four Christ-centered messages!  

CHaak GT PRC

February 2

True Faith

2 Timothy 1:12

Rev. C. Haak

February 9

Creation

Psalm 19:1-6

Rev. C. Haak

February 16

The Secret Providence of God

Romans 8:28

Rev. C. Haak

February 23

Jesus is My Savior

Matthew 1:21

Rev. C. Haak


RWH Website

If you haven’t visited our website recently, take a few minutes to check it out. We have an extensive broadcast archive which includes transcript versions of many messages, highlights of favorite messages, details on the stations that broadcast our messages and more. Visit at reformedwitnesshour.org.

 

Sponsor a Month of Reformed Witness Hour

When a church sponsors the Reformed Witness Hour, we air a promo before or after the week’s radio message that features the church. We can deliver a standard announcement, or a member of your church can write and voice the clip. If your church or evangelism committee would like to learn more about sponsoring the RWH, please contact us at mail@reformedwitnesshour.org.

 

 

What Radio Stations Broadcast RWH?

RWH is broadcasting in 15 different locations and 17 different stations. Pray for these stations and our program in these areas. Be sure to ask friends and family to share RWH within these communities!

Location

Station

Frequency                

Air Time

Carlisle, PA

WPFG

FM 91.3

Sunday, 8:00am

Chicago, IL

WYLL

AM 1160

Sunday, 4:00pm

Dallas, TX

KWRD

FM 100.7

Sunday, 9:00am

Denver, CO

KLTT

AM 670

Sunday, 10:30pm

Detroit, MI

WLQV

FM 92.7

AM1500

Sundays 9:00am

Fond du Lac, WI

WFDL

AM 1170

Sunday, 8:00am

Grand Rapids, MI

WFUR

AM 1570

FM 92.9

Sunday 4:00pm and

Wednesday 8:00pm

Lynden, WA

KARI

AM 550

Sunday 5:30pm

Pipestone, MN

KLOH

AM 1050

Sunday 8:00am

Pittsburgh, PA

WJAS

WORD

AM 1320

FM 101.5

Saturday 9:00am

Sunday 10:00am

Reedsburg, WI

WCNP

FM 89.5

Sunday 1:00pm

San Bernardino, CA

The Answer KTIE

AM 590

Sunday 6:00am and

Sunday 7:30am

Spokane, WA

KSPO

KTRW

FM 106.5

AM 630

FM 96.5

Sunday 5:00pm

Sunday 9:30am and

Sunday 9:30am

Wingham, Ontario, Canada

CKNX

AM 920

Sunday 8:00am

Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland Gospel

AM 846

Sunday 8:30am

 

Listen on Your Favorite Platform

On the Web:

Subscribe to RWH on one of these podcast apps:

  • iTunes
  • Google Play
  • Stitcher
  • Spotify
  • Player FM
  • TuneIn
  • iHeartRadio
  • the Podcast App
  • Himalaya
Read more...

Reformed Witness Hour Messages - January 2025

RWH Logo 2019

January 2025

January 5

Alpha and Omega
Revelation 1:8

Rev. W. Bruinsma

January 12

By Faith Looking for a City
Hebrews 11:9-10

Rev. W. Bruinsma

January 19

Not Just Hearers, But Doers
James 12:2-25

Rev. W. Bruinsma

January 26

God’s Everlasting Glory
Romans 11:33-36

Rev. W. Bruinsma

W Bruinsma RWH

In January 2025, we will broadcast four Christ-centered messages by Rev. Bruinsma, Lord willing. Be sure to listen to the new year message, Alpha and Omega, which speaks of the hope we have that allows us to carry on in the year to come: Our King, our Lord, is coming! He is directing everything that is taking place in our lives, in the church and in the world. He is the first this year and He is the end of this year; He is Alpha and Omega!

   

Sign Up for Our Email Newsletter!

Visit our website or go to eepurl.com/gikNsL to sign up for our monthly email.  You’ll receive one email each month with RWH news, statistics, interviews, message excerpts, and other great content.

 

PO Box 1230, Grand Rapids MI, 49501 | reformedwitnesshour.org | rwh@prca.org

Read more...

Covenant Reformed News - December 2024

Covenant Reformed News
December 2024 • Volume XX, Issue 8


 

The Call to the Apostolic Office

After considering the nature of the apostolic office in the last issue of the Covenant Reformed News, we now turn to the call to the apostolic office. The call to the apostolate was a direct and wonderful call from Christ Himself. Early in the days of His public ministry, Jesus personally called the twelve apostles (cf. Matt. 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16). As for Paul, the risen Christ appeared to him in a bright light from heaven and commissioned him, as we read in Acts 9, 22 and 26.

But what about Matthias, the apostle who replaced Judas Iscariot the traitor (Acts 1:15-20)? Like Joseph, Matthias fulfilled the basic qualification of having spent three years with the Saviour from His baptism by John the Baptist to His ascension into heaven (21-23). Of these two brethren, Matthias was chosen not by an election, whether by the church or by the eleven remaining apostles, but by the sovereign Lord by means of the lot in answer to their prayer (24-26).

The call to the apostolate was through a direct and wonderful call from Christ Himself, since an extraordinary office requires an extraordinary call! For a man to occupy the highest New Testament office that involves the authority and power to preach infallibly and to perform miracles, and includes all the other New Testament church offices and is universal in scope, he needs a direct and wonderful call from the Lord Jesus.

Various chapters of Paul’s second canonical letter to the Corinthians explain many features of his apostolic office that are in perfect accord with its extraordinary nature and call. There we read of Paul’s zealous apostolic piety (4, 6) and abundant apostolic suffering (1, 4, 6, 11) in the service of his Herculean apostolic labours (6, 11) and bearing authenticating apostolic fruit (3, 10).

Paul repeatedly refers to his apostolic office in his scriptural epistles, often in their very first verses. He is not ashamed of the gospel of righteousness by faith alone, even in Rome the imperial capital (1:15-17), and he writes to the church in that great city his most systematic theological epistle, as one who was “called to be an apostle” (1).

Paul curses the Judaizers in the Roman province of Galatia who pervert the good news by teaching justification by faith and works (1:7-9), as one who is “an apostle” and that “not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ” (1).

In II Timothy, even though he is in prison and about to be executed as if he were a vile criminal (4:6), Paul begins with a reference to his apostolic office (1:1), since he knows that his impending death is due to his preaching the apostolic gospel and is part of his apostolic sufferings.

This scriptural teaching regarding the extraordinary nature of apostles and their direct call from Christ exposes all the false apostles of the last 2,000 years. This includes those against whom Paul battled (cf. II Cor. 10-13), as well as the Popes of Rome (deceitful claimants to Peter’s apostolic office), the Mormon apostles, and the many thousands of Pentecostal, Charismatic and neo-Charismatic apostles. Once one understands what a real apostle is, the counterfeits are easy to identify. Rev. Angus Stewart

 

Is the Fourth Commandment Still in Effect?

We return in this article to this request from a reader in Wales: “Many people believe that the moral law of God (summarized in the Ten Commandments) was rendered obsolete along with the Mosaic civil and ceremonial laws. I know this is error. Please address this in the Covenant Reformed News.”

One of the arguments against the Ten Commandments as law for New Testament Christians is that the fourth commandment is never repeated in the New Testament, though all the other commandments are repeated. It is part of their argument that only the precepts of the New Testament, which they identify as the law of Christ, are obligatory on New Testament Christians, and even though many of those precepts are also to be found in the Ten Commandments, the moral law, they are not proof that the Ten Commandments are still in effect. We wish to deal with that argument in this article.

The fourth commandment declares, “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Ex. 20:8-11).

As the commandment itself reminds us, the sabbath was not merely instituted with the decalogue at Mount Sinai; it is a creation ordinance. Like marriage, the family (Gen. 1:28) and human government, the sabbath began with creation and not with the Mosaic law. It is not just a temporary Jewish institution or just a precept of the moral law. It is permanent, enduring as long as the creation itself, and belongs to those institutions that will last until Christ returns.

We are to remember the sabbath, not simply because God gave a command about it from Mount Sinai but for this reason: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day.” At creation, “the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it,” and did so for all time. Jesus meant that when He said, “The sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27). Of all the commandments, therefore, the fourth needed repeating less than any other.

Another argument for the all-time validity of the sabbath command is Jesus’ word to the Pharisees when disputing with them about the sabbath: “Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath” (28). The sabbath, He states, belongs to Him as Lord and Creator of all, and not to Moses. This was the reason also why He was able to change the day, while preserving the institution. The sabbath is, most emphatically, “the Lord’s day” in Revelation 1:10. For this reason, Jesus was scrupulous about sabbath observance, through He had no time for the nonsense of the Pharisees. Indeed, God Himself kept the sabbath after creating all things.

That the sabbath command, rooted in the creation of the world itself, has not been made null and void, is also clear from Hebrews 4:8-9: “For if Jesus [i.e., Joshua] had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest [literally, a sabbath or sabbath-keeping] to the people of God.”

Another argument against the permanence of the fourth commandment is that every day ought to be special to the Christian and every day he ought to “labour ... to enter into that rest” (11). We do not deny the truth of this. The Heidelberg Catechism, in its explanation of the fourth commandment, requires, “that all the days of my life I cease from my evil works, and yield myself to the Lord, to work by His Holy Spirit in me; and thus begin in this life the eternal sabbath” (A. 103). That is not an argument against a sabbath commandment, however. God’s ordinance that we live by our work and by the sweat of our face (Gen. 3:19) is not done away by His appointing special days in which work is forbidden.

Nevertheless, the opponents of the Ten Commandments argue that, because the command and creation itself specified the seventh day, and the day of worship in the New Testament is the first day of the week (many do not believe there is any special day of worship in the New Testament), the two cannot be the same. Thus, they say, the very fact that Christians worship on a different day is proof against the abiding validity of the Ten Commandments.

We believe that the change of day is not a change in the institution itself nor a voiding of the institution. It is a change only in the circumstances or details, not the essence of the commandment. When speed limits were reduced across America in 1973 in response to a world-wide oil crisis, the change in maximum speeds was not a change to the principle that there ought to be limits on the speed at which motorists drive.

The “first day of the week” (Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:2) is the day for preaching and breaking bread in the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7-12), and for taking collections for needy churches (I Cor. 16:1-2), a day known as “the Lord’s day” (Rev. 1:10), for it has a special connection to the Person and work of the Lord Himself. This is the day when the church assembles for worship (e.g., I Cor. 11:17, 20; 14:23-26; Heb. 10:25; James 2:2).

But how can we even be sure that the day was changed, since there is no explicit command telling us to worship on the first, rather than on the seventh, day of the week?

The resurrection of Christ (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1), and His appearances to the women and His disciples when assembled together (Matt. 28:2-10; Mark 16:2-14; Luke 24:2-49; John 20:2-29), and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-41; cf. Lev. 23:15-16) on the first day of the week, amount to a command. In other words, Jesus commands the observance of the first day of the week not by word but by example. These great works of redemption—Christ’s resurrection (and post-resurrection appearances) and the Spirit’s outpouring—all on the same day, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the first day of the week is special.

The Westminster Larger Catechism declares, “The fourth commandment requireth of all men the sanctifying or keeping holy to God such set times as he hath appointed in his word, expressly one whole day in seven; which was the seventh from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, and the first day of the week ever since, and so to continue to the end of the world; which is the Christian sabbath [Deut. 5:12-14; Gen. 2:2-3; I Cor. 16:1-2; Acts 20:7; Matt. 5:17-18; Isa. 56:2, 4, 6-7], and in the New Testament called The Lord’s day [Rev. 1:10]” (A. 116).

Sabbath means “rest” and refers to the spiritual rest which Jesus promises in Matthew 11:28-30: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” If that is what Jesus promises, then it is not surprising that Hebrews 4:9 tells us that there remains a rest for the people of God. It should also be obvious that the day of the week is not essential to that rest but subject to change, as it was changed by the great works of redemption that took place on the first day of the week.

We agree with those who say that the change of days reflects the difference between the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament, the promised rest lay still in the future and it was appropriate that the day of rest come at the end of the week, but now, in the New Testament, the Rest-giver Himself has come and by His saving work caused us to “enter into rest” (Heb. 4:3) through faith. It is appropriate, therefore, that the rest is at the beginning of the week and the remaining days be lived out of that accomplished rest.

All of this has been part of our argument for the permanence of the moral law, summed in the Ten Commandments. To the believing heart, the greatest argument for the permanence of the moral law is the blessedness promised in the Word of God to those who love and keep His commandments. They are those who say with the psalmist, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward” (19:7-11). They experience the truth of Psalm 119:1-2: “Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord. Blessed are they that keep his testimonies, and that seek him with the whole heart.”  Rev. Ron Hanko

Covenant Protestant Reformed Church
83 Clarence Street, Ballymena, BT43 5DR • Lord’s Day services at 11 am & 6 pm
Website: https://cprc.co.uk/ • Live broadcast: cprc.co.uk/live-streaming/
Pastor: Angus Stewart, 7 Lislunnan Road, Kells, N. Ireland, BT42 3NR • (028) 25 891851  
pastor@cprc.co.uk • www.youtube.com/cprcni • www.facebook.com/CovenantPRC
Read more...
Subscribe to this RSS feed

Contact Details

Denomination

  • Board of Trustees
  • prca.org Webmaster
  • Denominational Archivist
  • Reading Sermon Library
  • Taped Sermon Library

Synodical Officers

  • Synodical Stated Clerk
  • Assistant Synodical Stated Clerk
  • Synodical Treasurer
  • Denominational Bookkeeper
  • Assistant Synodical Treasurer

Synodical Committees

  • Theological School Committee
  • Catechism Book Committee
  • Emeritus Committee
  • Finance Committee 
  • Student Aid Committee

Contact/Missions

  • Committee for Contact with Other Churches
  • Domestic Mission Committee
  • Foreign Mission Committee

Classical Officers

Classis East
Classical Committee
Stated Clerk

Classis West
Classical Committee
Stated Clerk